The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

NEW YORK, NY - Photo by Brian Ach/Getty Images for TechCrunch

Benchmark venture capitalist Bill Gurley recently resigned from GrubHub’s board of directors. This move is mostly related to Gurley’s relationship at Uber and the Uber’s fledgling food delivery service that is in competition with GrubHub. I think, Gurley’s decision is one signal of a turning point for the sharing economy.

In the initial excitement for the sharing economy, many entrepreneurs started a lot of companies in the space. In the food delivery segment, GrubHub, along with other players like Caviar (the app now owned by Square Inc.), Postmates Inc. and Eat24 have tried to be part of the trend. While the sharing economy still has some opportunities, the food delivery business has extremely limited potential.

Beneath the hype, food delivery is only about marginal convenience. Some delivery may make sense in major metro areas like San Francisco and Los Angeles, but not everywhere. How much Chinese food do you have to deliver for your service to become cash flow positive? How many hamburgers do people have to eat , so you can meet your revenue targets?

My son recently used Postmates food delivery. The food part of the bill was $32. He was charged 9% service fee, plus $6.50 for delivery fee, and then a 20% tip on top of the entire bill. Meaning, he paid $49.86 for $32 worth of food. The service provided him a marginal convenience and no economical value. Many people can’t afford the expense and many more simply won’t pay for it.

At the end of the day, food delivery is not a game changer business; it is simply just a flash in the pan. There are also other new ideas reflecting the basic Uber or sharing economy concepts that have saturated the market.